Colorado Court of Appeals Adopts Test for Evaluating Claim of Actual Discharge Under Colorado Law
The Colorado Court of Appeals recently made a significant ruling in a case of first impression in Colorado, adopting a test for evaluating a claim of actual discharge under Colorado law. The case involved a former employee, Ms. Potts, who sued her employer for wrongful discharge against public policy.
Ms. Potts, a mandatory reporter at a childcare facility, reported perceived shortcomings of the facility to the state of Colorado, which led to an investigation. During the investigation, her employer asked her to go home early and then texted her to take off and enjoy the long holiday weekend. Ms. Potts interpreted this as a sarcastic message and assumed she had been terminated. She went to work the next week to collect her check and return company property, but her employer believed she had quit. Ms. Potts then brought a lawsuit for wrongful discharge.
The Colorado Court of Appeals clarified the distinction between actual discharge and constructive discharge. In the case of actual discharge, the court adopted an objective test, focusing on whether the circumstances would lead a reasonable employee to believe they had been terminated. The court found that Ms. Potts’s complaint included enough factual averments to support a plausible claim of actual discharge.
However, the court ruled against Ms. Potts on her claim of constructive discharge, stating that the conditions leading to her resignation were not egregious enough to overcome the normal motivation of employees to remain on the job.
The takeaway for Colorado employers from this case is to be mindful of the circumstances surrounding an employee’s termination and to ensure clear communication to avoid misunderstandings about the termination of employment.
This ruling by the Colorado Court of Appeals sets a precedent for future cases involving claims of wrongful discharge in Colorado and provides clarity on the evaluation of actual discharge under Colorado law.
